Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
So if we aren't willing to pay for a goalie like Markstrom what is he plan to get a actual proven #1?
People have criticized the team for not paying up for a proper #1. This is what that looks like.
If we aren't happy with Markstrom what exactly would we be happy with?
|
You need to draft and develop one, or identify one that is aged 23-25 and trade for him.
Kipper was 26 when we traded for him. He started to show some flaws by the time he was 30 with two sub .910 seasons at 30/31. Retired at 35.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
Price - great goalie, too much money
Lundqvist - great signing
Crawford - great
Schneider - great until injuries did him in
Smith - meh
Bobrovsky - dumb
Howard - never liked him, over-rated, bad signing
Lehtonen - whatever
So a pretty mixed bag. But not at all any kind of 'proof' that signing goalies is bad.
The only reason these goalies are all roughly the same age is because that is when players become free agents. 28-30 years old is not old. Keep it to 5 years or less, and no problem.
But it isn't about their age, it's about signing a good one.
Markstrom is a good one.
|
Every single goalie on that list was considered good at the time of their signing. Even if he is good (IMO he's above average but a tier below great) you're going to get 2 good years out of him. Look at all those goalies and look when they start to decline - at 32/33 years old.
Give it 2 years and everyone clamoring for Markstrom will be talking about how his contract is an anchor.